User:Sam Spade has created an attack page in his User space at [[User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin]]. Which is fine. If he wants to make his silly allegations there instead of in the official pages, he's more than welcome to do so. But now every one of his discussion page edits consists of an enormous signature with a link to the page and the signature of "Click here to report admin abuse". The signature doesn't even include his real name OR his User name. This is a clear case of a personal campaign against the admins listed on his page, and should not be allowed. Let him keep his page if he wants, but he should be required to remove the disruptive link in his signature. I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which he has no inclination to do.
RickK
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
I changed the signature after polite requests from some polite admins. Unlike certain obvious others, they are good representitives of the project, easy to comply with, and rare to offend. There are a number I'd like to compliment, but the hit squad against me is well known, and I've seen good editors driven off the project, or simply scorned after sticking up for me. The clique driven aspect of the wiki needs to change, the articles, as well as the editors are suffering.
Jack / Sam Spade
On 5/29/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which he has no inclination to do.
Shouldn't we give him time to actually respond to the request. I just saw someone else requesting him remove the sig 5 seconds ago.
--Mgm _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 5/28/05, Rick giantsrick13@yahoo.com wrote:
User:Sam Spade has created an attack page in his User space at [[User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin]]. Which is fine. If he wants to make his silly allegations there instead of in the official pages, he's more than welcome to do so. But now every one of his discussion page edits consists of an enormous signature with a link to the page and the signature of "Click here to report admin abuse". The signature doesn't even include his real name OR his User name. This is a clear case of a personal campaign against the admins listed on his page, and should not be allowed. Let him keep his page if he wants, but he should be required to remove the disruptive link in his signature. I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which he has no inclination to do.
What? This is insane. I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
From: Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com
What? This is insane. I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
"Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language.
Jay.
On 5/29/05, JAY JG jayjg@hotmail.com wrote:
From: Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com What? This is insane. I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
"Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language. Jay.
Nah. Not really. Or more clearly, it wasn't intended to be. If you honestly read it that way, then I suspect you and I speak differing versions of English.
In any case, if anyone was offended I do apologise.
JAY JG wrote:
From: Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com
What? This is insane. I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
"Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language.
It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that the person putting forth the idea is insane.
Ec
Ray Saintonge wrote
It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that the person putting forth the idea is insane.
It is utter madness to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane.
I wrote that, of course, without prejudice to the question of Ray's sanity. But how does it read in practice? A little of the 'transferred epithet'? Ideas of course do not enjoy mental health, good or otherwise.
Charles
Charles Matthews wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote
It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that the person putting forth the idea is insane.
It is utter madness to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane.
I wrote that, of course, without prejudice to the question of Ray's sanity. But how does it read in practice? A little of the 'transferred epithet'? Ideas of course do not enjoy mental health, good or otherwise.
In practice it reads as convoluted double-talk.
I suppose your thesis is right to the ultra-literalist. Perhaps those who transfer epthets should learn to read.
Ec
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
I had the page deleted, feeling it was causing more hard than good.
Jack
On 5/31/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Charles Matthews wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote
It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that the person putting forth the idea is insane.
It is utter madness to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane.
I wrote that, of course, without prejudice to the question of Ray's sanity. But how does it read in practice? A little of the 'transferred epithet'? Ideas of course do not enjoy mental health, good or otherwise.
In practice it reads as convoluted double-talk.
I suppose your thesis is right to the ultra-literalist. Perhaps those who transfer epthets should learn to read.
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
It doesn't matter, Jack.
When a rogue admin decides to persecute someone, there's nothing that can be done about it. Following policy and bringing it to this mailing list is certainly beyond useless.
-Enviroknot
From: Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com Reply-To: Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com,English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 02:45:22 +0200
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Inciden...
I had the page deleted, feeling it was causing more hard than good.
Jack
On 5/31/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Charles Matthews wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote
It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that the person putting forth the idea is insane.
It is utter madness to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane.
I wrote that, of course, without prejudice to the question of Ray's sanity. But how does it read in practice? A little of the 'transferred epithet'? Ideas of course do not enjoy mental health, good or otherwise.
In practice it reads as convoluted double-talk.
I suppose your thesis is right to the ultra-literalist. Perhaps those who transfer epthets should learn to read.
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/